LATEST NEWS

Ridley Scott Returning for Another 'Blade Runner' After 'Prometheus'!

You've come a long way, Ridley Scott. The man who once said that sci-fi is as dead as westerns has caught the sci-fi bug once again. Deadline reports that Ridley Scott is returning to direct "another installment" of Blade Runner after he finishes working on the potential-Alien-prequel Prometheus for Fox. Scott has fully signed on to direct and produce, and is working with Alcon Entertainment to develop. But unfortunately we don't know if it's a prequel, a sequel, or what. So there's no details on what it will be, but at least that Ridley Scott is restarting the Blade Runner franchise again after he finishes with his other science fiction franchise.

Deadline goes on to explain that this news only means the new Blade Runner is just entering it's "first step" of development, which means it could evolve and develop from here, just like Prometheus did once they got Damon Lindelof on-board to revise the script. But here's the most intriguing part of their write-up: "After injecting state of the art 3D in reviving Alien, imagine what Scott can do with Blade Runner? Now, the filmmaker is ready to engage." If you followed our live-blog of the Prometheus presentation at Comic-Con, Ridley participated via live satellite feed from Iceland and spoke, numerous times, about how he was having the best experience working on that film that he's had in quite a long time (ahem, Robin Hood). So maybe sci-fi's aren't as dead as westerns and this is the genre you always were meant to come back to, Mr. Scott?

Ridley directed the original Blade Runner in 1982, 3 years after he directed Alien in 1979. He's following a similar pattern again, jut 30 years later, but with an Alien prequel and maybe a Blade Runner prequel, if that is what it becomes. Deadline adds they don't now if he'll even contact Harrison Ford to return, but my guess (or hope) is that he'll move on to find a new group of actors, like he did with Prometheus. And I'm completely fine with that. If you remember, Alcon picked up the Blade Runner rights earlier this year, and was also vague about it being a prequel/sequel, but did say: "We have long-term goals for the franchise."

This is just awesome, exciting news, especially for die-hard sci-fi fans like myself. And I think it means sci-fi is really on the rise in big ways in Hollywood. Though I guess we still have to see how Prometheus turns out, but based on all the early footage we saw at Comic-Con, I've got a good feeling Ridley is finally back in the genre he belongs. At least at this point in his career, so we'll keep you updated! Thoughts on this news?

I love sci-fi, but blade runner was mind numbingly boring! There, I said it...

Anonymous

90's kid in the house...

Awtan90

I'm a 90's kid and I didn't find Blade Runner boring, so your comment is simply agist. Anyways at least he's honest. There's tons of people that just pretend to like movies like Blade Runner so they can fit in with the film crowd.

Marty

It was also mind-blowingly intelligent.

Tester

But here's the LEAST intriguing part of their write-up: "After injecting state of the art 3D in reviving Alien, imagine what Scott can do with Blade Runner? Both Alien and Blade Runner were about stories and the way they were filmed, not about their special effects, although yes they helped.

http://www.firstshowing.net Alex Billington

Ha, yea I know, 3D isn't everyone's favorite. I think the part I like is "the filmmaker is ready to engage" meaning Ridley is situated, his experience on one big 3D sci-fi film, and is getting more energized for the next one. And if they shoot in 3D from the start, there's nothing to worry about.

Tester

My comment was not really in regards to 3D, but really towards special effects in general. I remember when the great general Lucas commented on how he was ready to make the prequels because the technology was finally ready for his story.. Well I dont have to tell you how that turned out.
Special effects do not make a movie ( Avatar anyone), they certainly help, but they dont make a movie. 3d is not even worth discussing, adds nothing but cool factor to a movie ( that is when done right such as in Avatar).
I hope Ridley does not make the same mistake Lucas made.

Richie G

A moving story is good, but not all the time. Sometimes people just want to be excited and there isn't a roller coaster park or strip club in every town, but there is a cinema.
I'm not its biggest fan, but I wish the world would lay off Avatar

Tester

Richie G, while I can agree with both U and Alex, were are talking about Blade Runner which is a movie with a great story and backdrop.
As far as Avatar, I shit on it but I also gave it praise.

Loser

Wasn`t Deckard himself a Replicant? That was what I got anyways

Zot

I thought that was Republicant.. i always get those confused..

Nthngmn

There's never really a definite answer. Different versions of the film allude to that possibility. That's one of the best aspects of Blade Runner.

Ricardo

This is an absolutely terrible idea. And I absolutely love Blade Runner.

Anonymous

I think it would be most interesting to see a prequel just to see where all the story began than seeing a sequel because the replicants were a dying breed and to see how they stood up against slavery would be interesting just like Rise of the planet of the apes.

Scotty McFanboy

This is truly idiotic.

Cock McScottboy

Idiotic indeed.

January James

Shia LaBeouf would make a good Rick Deckard.
I hope Harrison Ford, Rutger Hauer, Daryl
Hannah, Sean Young, Joanna Cassidy and Edward James Olmos will have cameos as a
tribute to the original classic 1982 film.

lerryjee

I hope that comment about Shia LaBeouf was tongue in cheek.

John Simpson

Wow, these comments are filled with spam.

Richie G

Case in point

John Simpson

What is?

Brian

I'm not nearly as excited by this as you are. Dont get me wrong, I'm a massive scoence fiction fan, and Blade Runner is my all time facorite film.
But that doesn't mean I need to see any more BR stories. Scott already goldfish story -- and he told it in a way that feels complete. I don't need to know what happens next, or what happened before. I don't need him to try to recreate the magic that drove the original film -- magic that stemmed in no small part from the film's originality.
There is such a thing as overkill -- and over exposure. Blade Runner never was a "property," as such, and that's part of what makes it special. It's a movie -- a great movie. I say, let it stand on it's own.
Besides, wouldn't it be great if Scott could bring yet another science fiction movie -- as original as BR and Alien -- to the big screen? Now THAT would get me excited.

http://www.pewpewpew.de reeft

So true. Why does he need to revive SF in that way? Why not make totally original movies. That's how you revive something - in the long run. This just reminds of transplanting organs into a 80yold instead of having a new baby. (I'm weird).

Anonymous

of course you're right. the story was perfectly complete. yes, it has loose ends, that's why it's so good - you can use your imagination, without feeling short-changed. but Hollywood's not that big on originality these days.
Blade Runner blazed a trail for the look of so much in the last 30 years, just like Metropolis and a few others before it. i'd like to get excited about this, i really would. but everything's a 'property' now. very happy to be proven wrong, and i still have some faith in Ridley Scott, but very few manage to get the lightning back in the bottle.

http://www.pewpewpew.de reeft

This is horrible news. Nothing is sacred anymore. It will - no matter how good - be able to reach the heights of the classic. It will always be compared to its predecessor. This is horrible.

David Banner

Wow, this made my day! And on the mention of Harrison, he said recently in an interview that he knew of this project......fingers crossed

Anonymous

I'll all for Ridley Scott making more sci-fi, but I wish he would come up with an original idea. Never during the watching of Blade Runner did I ever want to know what happens next or what happen before. When it comes to sequels/prequels the main thing they need to ask themselves is "is there any more to this story that needs to be told." And the answer in this case is no. So basically what you have is a) Ridley Scott being lazy and piggybacking on his past and b) the studios only opening their wallets for an established title.

Anonymous

while we don't know their plans for the world of Blade Runner, you're right in that the story is so well written and portrayed that you know all you need to know about the characters from that film alone. like you, i think the film is self-contained, and rather wonderfully so.
the rights owner's response is best highlighted by 'We have long-term goals for the franchise.' ha! i'm sure it won't be long until some studio says they're making a sequel to Moon, in which *spoiler* we see what happens after Sam gets back to earth. and that would be just as pointless.

http://twitter.com/timzila Timothy

I don't understand all the negativity here.
I'm excited about Prometheus, but the idea of Ridley returning to the Blade Runner world is *extremely* exciting. Plus, if he follows the pattern set with Prometheus, this isn't likely to be a poorly executed and designed sequel, but another story set in the same world.

Anonymous

I'm not totally opposed to the idea if they can come up with 1) a good reason to make another Bladerunner movie and 2) don't try to make it a direct sequel or prequel or something that ties in directly to the first movie.
The problem with making another Bladerunner flick is that the original is freaking legendary. If you want to make a film associated with it you're going to have to hit the ball out of the park for critics to like it. Couple that with the fact that the unwashed masses and young people who are the bread and butter of the summer film season have either never seen the original or don't like it because it's too slow and hard for their caveman brains to make sense of. If your sequel has the same sort of plot and pacing as the first film it will bomb in the theater. Don't expect to recoup a $200 Million budget. You won't.
I honestly kinda hope this idea gets scrapped. I think I know why Scott is doing this sci-fi flicks, tho. He wants to make Brave New World but can't get a studio to fund it. Alien and Bladerunner are his big sci-fi movies and probably have the same sort of tone going on. I think he's just trying to get that project funded.

Anonymous

I don't know why people are opposing to the idea of this look at "Rise of the Planet of the Apes" and its been #1 nationwide for 2 weeks now...
You guys have no idea what Ridley Scott has in mind for this story it might be something that would blow all our minds that he intended to do back then but couldn't be done due to technological restrictions.
A good story always sells and Planet of the Apes movie proved that.

JOHNK55

Since Philip K Dick is dead, there are no "Blade Runner" stories left, unless they mean to actually make "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep." That might be interesting. But remaking Blade Runner ranks right up there with remaking The Day The Earth Stood Still. Oh! Wait! They did that. Boy did that suck.

horgin

All the people saying this is horrible news, and how the story was complete and what not.
It's complete for you, but maybe not for Scott. Maybe he had many more story ideas and paths for characters to tread on. You guys aren't the ones making the movie, he is. It's his baby, let him do with it as he sees fit. Maybe it will follow the same path as Star Wars, but then maybe it won't, maybe he'll make another, fantastic BR movie, and it will be loved and adored just like the first one.
Point is, I have enough faith in Scott to believe that he won't mess it up.

Supermanx

Bring on Blade Runner 2 The Attack of the Electric Sheeps.
Blade Runner is a Cult Movie. Since I first watched it I fell in love with it´s chaotic universe. Bring the whole cast if necessary.
What will happen with all those companies that publicised on the movie and now are more than gone.Will the production guys keep them in order to maintain continuity?
I want to see more of Olmos.

Jedibilly

"restarting the Blade Runner franchise again..." Blade Runner never was a franchise, right?

Luis M. Milán Leal

I like the idea of showing us the replicants' rebellion. I want to see attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion, and C-beams glittering in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate.

http://twitter.com/QuanahTweets Quanah

Harrison Ford's Deckard needs to be the main character or I quit.

http://www.allqualitymovies.com smithjackob

If the director's cut is a leap forward for the film, the final cut is
merely a few more steps after hitting the ground. It's a bit more
violent, and Scott's beloved, reinstated unicorn dream sequence is
further expanded by a matter of seconds.........

Greenblade

I love Blade Runner. A friend bought me a sequel novel, Edge of Human, years ago and I have yet to read it. A sequel is a chancy idea at best.
If it happens, please do not have Rick Deckard/HF as the protagonist, although he could cameo in his old boss Bryant's job.
We know Harry to old to go running around anymore.
Re: continuity-age the Blade Runner world 30 years, like ours has.
Also, Ridley, you've been great, but I think you're feeling your years...

Greenblade

Hey, Luis-
Watch Starship Troopers-you will see attack ships on fire off the shoulder of the arachnid planet.
It is an absolute visualization of that well-loved description.

Anonymous

They shouldn't bother Harrison Ford with a phone call. He's washed up, hasn't made a good movie in 20 years. Ridley needs a hit too.

Lebowski

Not one of you has mentioned Syd Mead, for fucking shame. He was responsible for most of what made Blade Runner such a great film, and the man is getting on. Plus, there aren't really any younger production designers at his level. He is a genius, and any BR film will be empty without him.